About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
or relief that at least the election didn't end up in a situation where obama won the electoral vote but romney got the popular vote. i agree that would have been bad. it would have denied the democrat the clear mandate. the implication from the right wing seemed to have been had the republican candidate won the popular vote, there would be trouble of some undefined type. what the heck did that mean? yes, we've had to put up with this ridiculous secession petitions out there, the texas version having been signed by over 100,000 people since election day, but could the right have gone further had it been armed with a popular vote victory? there does seem to be a difference in the two parties. when al gore lost 12 years ago, he ignored his 600,000 vote victory in the popular vote. he just learned to live with the irony. republicans have carefully forgotten this bit of history, but i have real doubts those on the angry, demanding right would have been so quietly obedient to constitutional law. there's something out there on the right right now that is still uneasy with this defeat. sear
obama, so they're blaming that liberal romney. that northeastern liberal crowd. texas senator-elect ted cruz is crueler still. he accuses romney of going out there and french kissing obama. yes, they're blaming romney now. they were blaming chris christie for working with obama during hurricane sandy. now they're blaming romney for dancing with him through the election. get it? the strict orthodox side of the republican party are blaming the candidate himself for giving away their virtue. ed rendell is the former governor of pennsylvania, and msnbc political analyst. matt kibbe is the president of freedomworks. governor and matt, this is the most unusual pairing i've ever been part of, you and matt kibbe, you and the man of the northeast establishment, a moderate governor of pennsylvania. here is matt railing at the ramparts against all you represent. this should be interesting. the right fights back. since the election a lot of republicans' soul searching has focused on the need to broaden the political base of the republican party. fiscal and social conservatives are saying that's the
government austerity on the rest of the country. all three collapsed in this election in 2012. now they have to decide which is strong enough to survive. my personal theory is the business wing was always the strongest and will be the surviving wing and you can hear that in the talk about loosening up on immigration. the business wing wants loser immigration rules. i think they're the one that's going to try to assert themselves but that's a cross purposes with the tea party wing that is dead set against immigration. >> don't trust the goodwill of the business community. the labor unions ought to be organizes, everybody comes in legal or not. the business community doesn't want real work, fast as they can and cheap as they can. >> to john about history. you and i remember i think back in 1988 as far back then, the democrats had won a race, this is a race, the key thing is not that you lose or lose by a lot, didn't lose by a huge amount, when you lose when you think you're going to win. that's when you rethink your party. just like dukakis, everybody thought he has it, going to work, the new
in this election. what made them think so? the polls were tight but favoring president obama. what north star was guiding the gop convincing them that the white house would be back in their hands in january? back where their hankerings were convinced it belonged? there was a darker side to this deep sense of executive entitlement, the sense they had the same assumed access to the white house as they did in the corporate dining room. it's more than a bit frighting. i have heard at least one person of the right state their pained belief or relief that at least the election didn't end up in a situation where obama won the electoral vote but romney got the popular vote. i agree that would have been bad. it would have denied the democrat the clear mandate. the implication from the right wing seemed to have been had the republican candidate won the popular vote, there would be trouble of some undefined type. what the heck did that mean? yes, we've had to put up with this ridiculous secession petitions out there, the texas version having been signed by over 100,000 people since election day, but cou
-faced. it has to do -- people at headquarters, they show up at election night, unless the guy or woman loses and they get excited about the guy near election night because they want a job. they want something. they want to be loved by the winner. then they treat the guy like a ticket at off-track betting on the floor you're stomping around on. is that the best case against the case being made against the republican party, it's a bunch of people just not loyal? that's what he's saying. >> absolutely, chris. look, i've been through this time and time again, that people are measuring the drapes before the first debate ends, especially if the nominee does a very good job. >> now they're measuring the crepe. >> true. mitt romney unfortunately never had any -- a loyal following, if you will, except for the folks in boston. the conservatives never trusted him. they didn't even trust him when he got the republican nomination back in the spring of this year. the point is these individuals are opportunists, both on the republican side and also on the democratic side. they don't care about loyalty. the
will about the election we just had. this one's hotter, nastier, more personal. one side says it's about character, about whether a close confederate of the president told the truth, the whole truth as she knew it when she went on national television and said the death of a u.s. ambassador was a spontaneous reaction to an anti-muslim video, some trouble-making clown made out in california. ignoring john mccain and his ail argue evidence it was an organized act of terrorism. not so says the president. his u.n. ambassador and close friend simply told the truth as she was permitted to tell it, what the cia gave her to say and no more. for that he charges susan rice, in the words of the new york post, being fried. political fight fans on the tabloids relish this extreme combat what should be a good person's judgment? that's my question tonight. is susan rice now a surrogate for the president, someone to take the punishment when others above her pay grade should be answering the questions, or is she accountable for going on national television knowing she can't tell the whole truth because it
'hanlon and jonathan landay. >>> elections have consequences, i say it all the time. and the democrats are feeling emboldened. they want to see taxes go up on the rich. they want to protect programs like medicare and medicaid. will they give president obama room to negotiate some kind of deal that gets through this hell coming january 1st. they say they won, the other side lost, they're going to fight. >>> plus democrats are moving to end the so-called silent filibuster which republicans have used to quietly say if you don't have 60 votes, you ain't going nowhere. this is the big question, if they're successful, it's possible, it's possible the democrats will be able to get some things done. we'll talk about that in a minute. they're going to be just like jimmy stewart finally. they're going to force them to actually filibuster like they did in "mr. smith goes to washington." anytime they really want to shut down the senate. >>> and the democrats considered least likely to win back her senate seat beats the odds, and i think thanks to todd akin, and is back for a second term. our friend, the great
to be president and late on morals and and dog doing it aggressively. collapsed in this election in 2012. now they've to decide which of them is strong enough my personal theory is the business wing was always stronger wing will be will be the surviving wing. you can hear this in the talk about loosening up on immigration. the business wing wants looser rules, they are going to assert themselves but that's across purposes with the tea party wing dead set against immigration. >> don't trust the goodwill of the business community. the labor union will be jumping out there, everybody comes in legal or not. and the business community doesn't want real immigration. >> they wages. >> they don't want work permits. they want it as fast and cheap as they can. >> let's go to john about history. you and i remember in 1988 the democrats had wonrace. this is a race the key thing here not that you lose or lose by a lot. they didn't lose by a huge amou=n you think you're going to win. that's when younk your party. just like dukakis, up by 17 and loses by 8 andpy could have lost b
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)